+1 - checked sums and sigs: Ok - Rat check: Ok - built from source: Ok (8u92) - Ran unit tests: Ok - Messed around with some basic shell commands: Ok - Loaded and read 1M rows with LTT: Ok - Sanity checked Web UI: Ok
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 12:28 AM Peter Somogyi <psomo...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > * Signature, checksum: OK > * Apache Rat check: OK > * Build from source: OK > * CHANGES.txt: OK > * Unit tests (8u191, Maven 3.5.3): OK > * LTT 1M rows: OK > * Shell commands: OK > * Web UI: OK > > On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 7:01 AM Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > YCSB workloads are not that interesting. I think it’s still useful as a > > “standard” tool though that indicates we aren’t doing worse. Also, there > > may be more difference under overload conditions. Next time. > > > > Using Phoenix and some of our internal test tools we can generate > > workloads that turn up interesting differences at the day job, but mostly > > between 0.98 and any 1.x, and the changes were small and additive over > > time. Some of our folks contributed perf fixes that return some of the > > difference, 10%, 20% here and there. There are opportunities for more. > > > > For 1.5 branch-1 has some interesting changes, like pressure aware > > compaction rate limiting on by default, which may change things (via > > influence on GC). TinyLRU if it goes in might also be interesting. > > > > > > > On Dec 7, 2018, at 8:02 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for the test runs. > > > > > > The diffs are miniscule. After so many releases, would have expected a > > > tendency up or down but not constant (smile). > > > > > > S > > > > > >> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:34 PM Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Today I did a comparison between 1.2.6.1 and 1.4.9RC1 with YCSB. The > > >> results are close. Overall runtimes are almost the same. In the > average > > and > > >> high percentile measures there is a general upward trend but nothing > > that > > >> looks like a significant regression. Still for 1.5.0 I think we should > > see > > >> if it's possible to lower measures made by YCSB closer to those > observed > > >> with 1.2. > > >> > > >> Linux version 4.14.55-62.37.amzn1.x86_64 > > >> c3.8xlarge x 5 > > >> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_181-shenandoah-b13) > > >> -Xms20g -Xmx20g -XX:+UseG1GC -XX:+AlwaysPreTouch -XX:+UseNUMA > > >> -XX:-UseBiasedLocking -XX:+ParallelRefProcEnabled > > >> Hadoop 2.8.5 > > >> Init: Load 100 M rows and snapshot > > >> Run: Delete table, clone and redeploy from snapshot, run 10 M > operations > > >> (except 1M for workload E) > > >> Args: -threads 100 -target 50000 (except 10000 for workload E) > > >> > > >> YCSB Workload A > > >> > > >> target 50k/op/s 1.2.6.1 1.4.9 > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> [OVERALL], RunTime(ms) 200581 200605 > > >> [OVERALL], Throughput(ops/sec) 49855 49849 > > >> [READ], AverageLatency(us) 491 517 > > >> [READ], MinLatency(us) 233 273 > > >> [READ], MaxLatency(us) 140287 165503 > > >> [READ], 95thPercentileLatency(us) 605 647 > > >> [READ], 99thPercentileLatency(us), 880 1031 > > >> [UPDATE], AverageLatency(us) 1332 1327 > > >> [UPDATE], MinLatency(us) 711 692 > > >> [UPDATE], MaxLatency(us) 137215 160383 > > >> [UPDATE], 95thPercentileLatency(us) 1790 1800 > > >> [UPDATE], 99thPercentileLatency(us) 2333 2495 > > >> > > >> YCSB Workload B > > >> > > >> target 50k/op/s 1.2.6.1 1.4.9 > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> [OVERALL], RunTime(ms) 200569 200566 > > >> [OVERALL], Throughput(ops/sec) 49858 49859 > > >> [READ], AverageLatency(us), 438 445 > > >> [READ], MinLatency(us) 198 216 > > >> [READ], MaxLatency(us) 143615 153343 > > >> [READ], 95thPercentileLatency(us) 539 552 > > >> [READ], 99thPercentileLatency(us) 806 957 > > >> [UPDATE], AverageLatency(us) 1098 1064 > > >> [UPDATE], MinLatency(us) 746 762 > > >> [UPDATE], MaxLatency(us) 141183 149503 > > >> [UPDATE], 95thPercentileLatency(us) 1334 1336 > > >> [UPDATE], 99thPercentileLatency(us) 1695 1777 > > >> > > >> YCSB Workload C > > >> > > >> target 50k/op/s 1.2.6.1 1.4.9 > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> [OVERALL], RunTime(ms) 200543 200559 > > >> [OVERALL], Throughput(ops/sec) 49865 49861 > > >> [READ], AverageLatency(us) 348 340 > > >> [READ], MinLatency(us) 174 182 > > >> [READ], MaxLatency(us) 140287 161279 > > >> [READ], 95thPercentileLatency(us) 428 421 > > >> [READ], 99thPercentileLatency(us) 793 841 > > >> > > >> YCSB Workload D > > >> > > >> target 50k/op/s 1.2.6.1 1.4.9 > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> [OVERALL], RunTime(ms) 200557 200577 > > >> [OVERALL], Throughput(ops/sec) 49861 49856 > > >> [READ], AverageLatency(us) 528 503 > > >> [READ], MinLatency(us) 187 213 > > >> [READ], MaxLatency(us) 134655 147199 > > >> [READ], 95thPercentileLatency(us) 1395 991 > > >> [READ], 99thPercentileLatency(us) 1880 1721 > > >> [INSERT], AverageLatency(us) 1272 1245 > > >> [INSERT], MinLatency(us) 830 827 > > >> [INSERT], MaxLatency(us) 124479 140671 > > >> [INSERT], 95thPercentileLatency(us) 1518 1505 > > >> [INSERT], 99thPercentileLatency(us) 2249 2553 > > >> > > >> YCSB Workload E > > >> > > >> target 10k/op/s 1.2.6.1 1.4.9 > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> [OVERALL], RunTime(ms) 100564 100584 > > >> [OVERALL], Throughput(ops/sec) 9944 9942 > > >> [SCAN], AverageLatency(us) 4297 3700 > > >> [SCAN], MinLatency(us) 765 740 > > >> [SCAN], MaxLatency(us) 1229823 1056767 > > >> [SCAN], 95thPercentileLatency(us) 10503 9855 > > >> [SCAN], 99thPercentileLatency(us) 22655 19007 > > >> [INSERT], AverageLatency(us) 3178 2707 > > >> [INSERT], MinLatency(us) 935 885 > > >> [INSERT], MaxLatency(us) 1020415 148479 > > >> [INSERT], 95thPercentileLatency(us) 5795 4927 > > >> [INSERT], 99thPercentileLatency(us) 13791 9727 > > >> > > >> YCSB Workload F > > >> > > >> target 50k/op/s 1.2.6.1 1.4.9 > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> [OVERALL], RunTime(ms) 200619 200583 > > >> [OVERALL], Throughput(ops/sec) 49846 49855 > > >> [READ], AverageLatency(us) 577 610 > > >> [READ], MinLatency(us) 246 270 > > >> [READ], MaxLatency(us) 131455 127743 > > >> [READ], 95thPercentileLatency(us) 815 909 > > >> [READ], 99thPercentileLatency(us) 1525 1549 > > >> [READ-MODIFY-WRITE], AverageLatency(us) 2006 2050 > > >> [READ-MODIFY-WRITE], MinLatency(us) 1105 1116 > > >> [READ-MODIFY-WRITE], MaxLatency(us) 164095 178303 > > >> [READ-MODIFY-WRITE], 95thPercentileLatency(us) 2723 2855 > > >> [READ-MODIFY-WRITE], 99thPercentileLatency(us) 4423 4415 > > >> [UPDATE], AverageLatency(us) 1427 1438 > > >> [UPDATE], MinLatency(us) 703 727 > > >> [UPDATE], MaxLatency(us) 80767 128703 > > >> [UPDATE], 95thPercentileLatency(us) 1993 2031 > > >> [UPDATE], 99thPercentileLatency(us) 2727 2751 > > >> > > >> > > >>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 4:45 PM Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>> The second HBase 1.4.9 release candidate (RC1) is available for > > download > > >>> at https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-1.4.9RC1/ and > > >> Maven > > >>> artifacts are available in the temporary repository > > >>> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1240/ > > >>> > > >>> There was no vote on 1.4.9RC0. > > >>> > > >>> The git tag corresponding to the candidate is '1.4.9RC1' > (d625b212e4). > > >>> > > >>> A detailed source and binary compatibility report for this release is > > >>> available for your review at > > >>> > > >> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-1.4.9RC1/compat-check-report.html > > >>> . There are no reported compatibility issues. > > >>> > > >>> A list of the 22 issues resolved in this release can be found at > > >>> https://s.apache.org/fNPx . > > >>> > > >>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/0/-1. > > >>> > > >>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Unless objection I will > > try > > >>> to close it Friday December 14, 2018 if we have sufficient votes. > > >>> > > >>> Prior to making this announcement I made the following preflight > > checks: > > >>> > > >>> RAT check passes (7u80) > > >>> Unit test suite passes 5/5 (7u80, 8u172) > > >>> LTT load 100M rows with 100% verification and 20% updates (8u181) > > >>> ITBLL 500M rows with slowDeterministic monkey (8u181) > > >>> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Best regards, > > >> Andrew > > >> > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's > > >> decrepit hands > > >> - A23, Crosstalk > > >> > > >
